Tag Archives: Religious Liberty

Persecution of Christians. Whether by the laws of governments, or the bullying voices of the media, or the bloody attacks by both governments and other religions, the persecution of Christianity is growing throughout the world.

Most frightening is the dramatic increase in violent persecution. Three weeks ago Taliban suicide bombers killed 85 worshippers at All Saints’ church in Pakistan. Two months ago Islamists attacked 63 churches in Egypt. Last month Syrian Christians begged President Obama not to bomb President Assad, because he is their only protection from the Islamist rebels. I could go on and on.

Yet the media and our government has been mostly silent. But what would we expect, when they too have joined in the persecution?

The media mocks us and calls us bigots and haters, simply because we reject the immorality they embrace. And our government continues to try to marginalize faithful Christians, especially Catholics. The most high profile of these attempts is the HHS mandate related to Obamacare, which (in spite of ongoing lawsuits brought by over 78 businesses, charities, universities and Catholic Dioceses) now requires most Catholic employers to provide insurance for their employees that pays for abortion inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization.

Sadly, last month the Little Sisters of the Poor had to join in those lawsuits or face millions of dollars in penalties. As one sister said: “We cannot violate our vows.” Think of that: those beautiful little nuns, who visit us every year around Christmas radiating the very love of Christ through their work with the poor… Our government says they aren’t really part of the Catholic Church, so they have to violate their Catholic morals in order to continue to work with the poor.

But the persecution doesn’t stop there. For most of the last year Virginians have witnessed a very disconcerting race for governor. On one side, we find a Catholic who, although not perfect, is strongly faithful to the Church’s teaching on the most important moral issues of our time: abortion, traditional marriage and religious liberty. And on the other side we find his opponent, a “Catholic” who is strongly opposed to those key teachings.

For months the faithful Catholic has been attacked viciously and incessantly by his opponent for supposedly being “anti-women” and “anti-gay.”

He’s repeatedly attacked for being “anti-woman” simply because he’s against abortion. In particular, they attack him because he supports new restrictions on abortion clinics. But who is anti-woman: the faithful pro-life Catholic who also wants to protect women from unsafe and unsanitary clinics, or his pro-abortion opponent who doesn’t seem to care?

And they attack him because he supposedly tried to take away women’s contraception. What he actually did was support a law that would define tiny babies as “persons” from the moment of conception. That has nothing to do with contraception, which by definition takes place prior to the moment of conception.

But the most despicable attack is the lie his opponent keeps repeating, supposedly quoting him saying “gay people are soulless.” As the Washington Post (who endorsed his opponent) reported last week: “What [he] actually said… was, “When you look at the homosexual agenda, I cannot support something that I believe brings nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their soul.” That’s not a bigot who hates homosexuals. That’s a Catholic who is concerned for homosexuals because he believes their behavior hurts them.

Some say they’re just attacking his political positions, not persecuting him for his Catholicism. But that ignores the context; the Catholic Church stands as the major stumbling block to those advancing the secular pro-abortion/pro-gay agenda. So they systematically attack the Church and all faithful Catholics, through the media, regulation and political campaigns. In the end they effectively say that all faithful Catholics are disqualified from holding public office because they are bigots and haters. And that, is, by definition, religious persecution.

But it shouldn’t be this way—not in America. After all, Article VII, Section 3, of our Constitution provides: “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” And the 1st Amendment to that Constitution guarantees that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

And it especially shouldn’t be this way in Virginia, which planted the seed of American religious liberty, when, in 1779, Thomas Jefferson introduced the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. “…[A]ll men” it said, “shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities….” Because to do so would “be an infringement of [a] natural right.”

Religious persecution of Christians abounds in today’s world. And no one seems to care.

But we care, don’t we? Because WE ARE Christians: and when they persecute our brothers and sisters in Christ they persecute us. As Pope Francis asked, just a few weeks ago: “Am I indifferent to that, or does it affect me like it’s a member of the family? … Does it touch my heart, or doesn’t it really affect me….?”

Do we not care about the Christians in Syria, Egypt, Africa, China, North Korea or Vietnam? Are they too different or too far away for us to care about them? What about our fellow countrymen? Are the Little Sisters of the Poor too insignificant or is the faithful Catholic politician too damaged by false accusations for us to care about?

Who will defend persecuted Christians if Christians won’t—if we won’t? So we must. But what can we do?

First we remember that the Lord is all-powerful, “the maker of heaven and earth,” so that “nothing is impossible for God.” And second, we must not cease to call on that power in constant prayer.

Third, we must take action. In particular we must no longer be silent when our brothers and sisters are persecuted. We must speak out in our homes, jobs and schools, with our family and friends, and with our government officials.

And finally, we must participate in the political process. In particular, faithful Christians must run for public office, and when they do the rest of us must support them, to the extent possible, with our prayers, time, voices, money and with our votes!

Above our altar hangs a Crucifix, representing the very first persecution of Christianity. But the Cross was also Christ’s perfect prayer to His Father. So let us join our prayers to the prayer of our Crucified Lord, made present today in the Eucharist, begging His Father to give us the love to care for and the courage to defend our persecuted brothers and sisters in Christ, whether they live across the globe or in our own beloved Virginia.

Quick Request: We are in dire need for additional Eucharistic Adorers for the 11am-12pm and 12-1pm hours on Fridays. “Could you not watch one hour with me?”

Last Week’s Bulletin. I apologize that we were not able to distribute the complete 6 page bulletin to you last week. I hope the single-sheet “abbreviated bulletin” we threw together was helpful, and I’m sorry if any group felt short changed if something they had running in the full bulletin was omitted. By now I hope you all received your copy of that full bulletin, mailed to each parish household courtesy of the bulletin company.

Lent Series. Lent is just around the corner and we will soon give you details about the Lenten schedule. But I wanted to announce early on that Fr. Paul Scalia (Bishop’s Delegate for Clergy) will be giving a Lenten series on five Thursday evenings, beginning Feb. 21. Father’s topic: “The Beatitudes.” Fr. Scalia is a bright and gifted speaker, and I am delighted he has agreed to speak. Please mark your calendar.

“Call to Prayer for Life, Marriage and Religious Liberty.” As I wrote in last week’s column, St. Raymond’s will take part in the United States Bishops’ “Call to Prayer for Life, Marriage and Religious Liberty.” I hope you will be able to actively participate in all 5 parts:
1) Monthly Eucharistic Holy Hour on every last Wednesday of the Month, from 6pm to 7pm.
2) Daily Rosary.
3) Praying for life, marriage and religious liberty at every Mass, both privately and in every Sunday’s Prayer of the Faithful.
4) Meatless Fridays: abstaining from meat of any kind (other than fish) on all Fridays of the year.
5) Observing a Second Fortnight for Freedom in the two weeks before the Fourth of July, much as we did last summer.

BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA AND “GAYS.” Perhaps you’ve heard by now that after years of courageously fighting off efforts by gay activists the Boy Scouts of America is now considering repealing their national policy prohibiting membership by openly “gay” people (both at the scout and adult leader levels) and leaving it to the local chartering organizations (e.g., St. Raymond’s) to set policy for their particular troops. BSA’s statement reads in part:

Currently, the BSA is discussing potentially removing the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation. This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation, and the chartered organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs. BSA members and parents would be able to choose a local unit that best meets the needs of their families.

The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue. The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.

This change in policy is greatly disappointing: another huge loss for common sense, morality, Christianity and America. And although the proposed BSA policy change would allow troops like the one at St. Raymond’s to determine its own policy in this regard, Scout troops do not operate in a vacuum, but rather in conjunction and cooperation with other troops locally, statewide and nationally. On a practical level that means, for example, that since not all troops would keep the ban in place, our own local/parish policy would be useless any time our boys took part in any of the many activities open to other troops.

But there is more to this than the “practical.” What does it say when a group dedicated to forming men to fulfill their “duty to God and country” and to be “morally straight” doesn’t understand one of the most basic concepts of morality and human nature? What does it say when a group for years strenuously fights the forces of immorality, and then one day simply capitulates? What does it say that we continue as members of this group?

Consider the words of Jesus: “If a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand.” First “gay” activists just wanted their basic rights protected, and we agreed because it was only just. Then they wanted special laws to protect them from hate, and since Christians are against hate, we agreed. But then they said that if we call what they do or feel a “disorder” or a “sin,” then we are the haters, and no organization can be tolerated that takes a position they deem to be “hateful” toward them. And now they demand that we call their perverted relationships by the sacred name of “marriage.”

The modus operandi is clear. If they win this victory at BSA, they will not stop there. Why should they? The next step will be to use this victory to attack the local chartering organizations, like the troop at St. Raymond’s.

Well, as for me, as pastor and the one responsible for the troop, who signs the charter agreement every year, if this change is made I will not let our parish be associated with this group or provide the opportunity for my spiritual children to be.

So if this policy change goes through, St. Raymond’s will severe its relationship with BSA. No more compromising with the devil.

Now, lets’ be clear: I very much want to keep Scouting at St. Raymond’s, and the change has not been made yet. But the BSA board meets this coming Tuesday to make a decision. So it’s not too late to do something , but we must act quickly. Please call the BSA at 972-580-2000 to tell them that this change must not be made. You might also contact them through their website, http://www.scouting.org/ContactUs.aspx. You can also contact The Catholic Committee on Scouting at NCCS@scouting.org.

But most of all, pray. Pray that God will spare this organization that has done so much for so many young men, to teach them to be dutifully serve God and country, and to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. And pray, through the intercession of St. George (patron of scouting) and St. Raymond, that we will be able to continue to offer our boys the benefits of scouting.

Back from South Bend. As I wrote in my last column, I was out of town last weekend, officiating at a family wedding in South Bend, IN. It was a great weekend, not only because of the wedding, but also since I was able to visit with all my brothers and sisters and most of my nieces , nephews, grand-nephews and grand-nieces. But I have to apologize: it seems I brought the frigid cold weather back with me to NoVa. Sorry.

Fighting the Good Fight. This last week we witnessed 2 important events on the National Mall in Washington: on Monday it was the second inauguration of President Obama and on Friday it was the March for Life. It is a sad thing that these 2 events stand in opposition to each other, but they do, since the first involves the retaining of the most pro-abortion president in our nation’s history, and the second involved, necessarily, standing in opposition to that president.

But even though Christians may find themselves feeling discouraged at the inauguration of a this man who is not only strongly pro-abortion but also actively promotes contraception, “gay marriage,” and oppression of religious liberty, we should also take heart. First, we remember that every presidential inauguration also celebrates the peaceful passing of power according to the free election of the people. So that it refreshes our hope that the “game is not up,” and we redouble our efforts to win the hearts and minds of our fellow citizens, and look forward to seeing that bear fruit in future inaugurations. And second, with the gathering of hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers in the same location just 4 days after this inauguration we remember that we are not alone and are not defeated. Rather, with faith in Christ and in His grace, we begin again to “fight the good fight.”

“Call to Prayer for Life, Marriage and Religious Liberty.” As part of this “good fight” I am inviting all St. Raymond parishioners to join me in taking part in the United States Bishops’ “Call to Prayer for Life, Marriage and Religious Liberty.” This initiative involves 5 parts:

1) Monthly Eucharistic Holy Hour: Every Last Wednesday of the Month we will have a Holy Hour from 6pm to 7pm, and offer special prayers for life, marriage and religious liberty. This will take place during the last hour of the currently regularly scheduled Wednesday Exposition and Adoration. The first “Holy Hour for Life, Marriage and Religious Liberty” will take place this coming Wednesday, January 30, at 6pm.

2) Daily Rosary: All parishioners are asked to pray the Daily Rosary, either individually or as a family, for life, marriage and religious liberty.

3) Intentions at Mass: We will continue to include petitions for the protection of life, marriage and religious liberty in every Sunday’s Prayer of the Faithful, and I ask that those who attend weekday Mass keep these intentions in your prayers at those Masses.

4) Meatless Fridays: As I have often reminded you, the Lord taught his apostles that some terrible evils are conquered only through acts of penance: “This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer and fasting” (Mark 9:29). With that in mind, and following the Bishops’ current initiative, I encourage all parishioners to abstain from meat of any kind (other than fish) on all Fridays of the year. (Of course, Catholics are required to do some form of penance every Friday of the year. Traditionally, the penance normally offered on Fridays is abstinence from meat, although most Catholics either replace it with another form of penance [which is permitted] or neglect to offer any penance at all [not permitted]. During Lent abstinence from meat is absolutely required on every Friday for all Catholics over 13 years of age. Note, however, except in Lent, failure to do Friday penance does not constitute a mortal sin).

5) This summer we will observe a Second Fortnight for Freedom in the 2 weeks before the Fourth of July, much as we did last summer.

These are just a few small things we can do to help keep up the good fight for life, marriage and religious liberty in our parish and our country. I add to this list my own continuing invitation to parishioners to join me in abstaining from meat and praying the Rosary (at least) every Wednesday as well. And while all these small efforts will be effective in their own way, they also serve as reminders that we must constantly look for new ways to promote and encourage others in the truth, always charitably, respectfully and peacefully.

Next Sunday, Blessing of the Throats. As most of you know, every year on February 3, the Feast of St. Blaise, the Church provides a special “Blessing of Throats.” This year February 3 falls on a Sunday, so the Feast of St. Blaise is suppressed, but the Blessing of Throats will still take place in abbreviated form. Because of the large number of people at Sunday Mass, rather than giving individual Blessings with the candles, the Blessing will be given once for all present at each Mass as part of the final blessing at all Sunday Masses.

A Note from Deacon Barnes. Our good seminarian-deacon asked me to publish the following note to you all. Let us keep him in our prayers.

I am extremely grateful and humbled by everyone at St. Raymond’s for their prayers and support over these past six years as I near the completion of my formation for the priesthood. In particular, as some of you may know, I received the very generous and gracious offer from the parish to buy my first Mass vestment. Fr. De Celles has been so kind to me and has assisted me greatly in this process. A first Mass vestment is very special and important. You will see me use it when I, please God, celebrate my first Mass of Thanksgiving at St. Raymond’s on June 9. Celebrating Mass for the first time is something deeply treasured by anyone preparing for the priesthood, and it is made all the more special by this gift. Now that the vestment is finished and paid for, I wanted to express how thankful I am that the parish would do this for me. It is a stunningly beautiful vestment but more than that, it will be a great and undeserved honor to wear it and to pray with and for you as a priest of Jesus Christ. I will always think of all of you whenever I will use it. My hope is that my first Mass will also be an occasion which inspires more young men and women from our parish to answer the Lord’s tremendous call to serve Him and His Church as a priest or as a consecrated religious. Your generous support will certainly play a significant role in that regard. May God Bless you and thank you so much, Deacon Nicholas Barnes.

October 21, 2012
Homily by Fr. John De Celles
St. Raymond of Peñafort Catholic Church
Springfield, Va.

You know, one of the great consolations of being a priest here at St. Raymond’s
is the kindness of our parishioners.
But sometimes people, even very kind people, complain about what I do.
And I understand that and I try not to let it bother me,
because first of all I know I screw up,
and second, well, I know that you can’t please all the people all the time.
Besides, I’m a big boy, I can handle,
especially when criticisms are presented with charity.

Sometimes, though, it can be a little frustrating.
Especially when I get comments that go in exactly the opposite directions.
For example, a few weeks ago I got a number of notes from parishioners
telling me my homily was absolutely beautiful and powerful,
well organized, clear, methodical and moving.
And the same day I got a couple of notes from other parishioners telling me
it was the worst homily they’d ever heard, it was hurtful, rambling, and cold;
and that I should be ashamed of myself.

What do you do with that?
Sometimes it kind of reminds me of today’s Gospel,
where John and James come up to Jesus and say:
“Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.”

Even so, lately the number of complaints
about my homilies have gone up noticeably.
And even though the number of compliments have also gone way up,
way more than the number of complaints,
I still feel I need to consider the concerns at the core
of some of the complaints.

In particular, that I’m preaching too much about politics,
and that I use language that is too direct and too passionate.
And that I seem to be “telling people how to vote.”

Let me begin by saying, in everything a priest does
he should take to heart what Jesus says to his apostles today:
“whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant;…
For the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve.”
We are not to “lord” our authority over our people, but to humbly serve them.

But the thing is, notice what Jesus says to John and James today:
“to sit at my right or at my left is not mine to give
but is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
His Father had already decided who would sit where in the Kingdom,
so even though Jesus came to serve us, beginning with his apostles,
he came to serve His Father first—to be obedient to his Father’s plan.

Also, remember what John and James call Jesus.
Before they tell him what they want him to do for them, they first call him: ,
“Teacher.”
Jesus is a servant, who serves by teaching.
How well does a teacher serve his students, if he tells them just what they hear.
So, Jesus serves by teaching them what they need to hear,
what his Father wants them to hear.

So, as a priest, that’s my job: to serve you by teaching;
to teach not what you want to hear,
or what I want you to hear,
but what Jesus and his Father want you to hear.

Now lately some have been upset that I’m preaching too much about politics.
But I’m not really preaching about politics.
I’ve been preaching about Christ’s teaching, the Church’s teaching,
and calling attention to the obvious conflicts
between the world and that teaching.
Some say, but Father, what about the wall of separation of Church and state?
But should the Church be silent when the state makes immoral laws,
or when candidates are in favor of immoral laws?
Good lord, how many times has the church been criticized for remaining silent
and letting immoral laws stand unquestioned?

For example…
In the year 1839 Pope Gregory XVI issued a document called “In Supremo,”
reiterating the Church’s ancient teaching against slavery,
specifically reproaching those who:
“dare to …reduce to slavery
Indians, Blacks or other such peoples….
as if they were not humans but rather mere animals.”

Unfortunately, some Catholics, in particular, some American bishops and priests
—especially Southern bishops and priests—
tried to argue that the doctrine didn’t apply to American slavery,
because somehow it was “different.”
It seems they got caught up in the prevailing attitude of the culture around them
and were influenced more by what their people wanted them to say,
than what Christ and the Church demanded that they say,
and so either twisted papal teaching into something it was not,
or simply chose to remain silent.

This, of course, led the laity to be confused about the morality of slavery.
And that confusion led to a terrible social disaster just a few years later,
when in 1857, a supposedly “devout Catholic” named Roger Taney,
writing as the fifth Chief Justice of the United States,
wrote the opinion in the Supreme Court case known as “Dred Scott,”
upholding the institution of slavery in the America.

This is what happens when bishops and priests
fail to clearly point out laws that are evil in the sight of Christ.
And so slavery continued, and 600,000 Americans died in the Civil War,
and millions of Black Americans suffered racial oppression
for a 100 years after that.
And while their parishioners may have been happy in their pews,
we are ashamed of the failures of those southern priests and bishops.

But when priests and bishop speak up,
and serve their people by teach the truth,
even when people get tired of hearing it,
wonderful things can happen.
Almost exactly a century after the Dred Scott case, in 1956,
an American Catholic bishop served his people
by stubbornly repeating the teaching of the Church,
and even in the face of the mockery and violence,
even by his own people,
refused to conform himself to public sentiment,
refused to accept some artificial line between Church and state
that would defend the racial segregation of the deep South.
His name was Francis Rummel, the Archbishop of New Orleans,
and what he did was desegregate the Catholic schools of his archdiocese. And when large groups of Catholic lay people continued to try to block his efforts,
after ample warning, he excommunicated their leaders.

Imagine if the American Catholic bishops of the mid-1800’s
had been as courageous as Archbishop Rummel:
if they had stood united against slavery,
banging the drum of justice over and over again
so their people would finally listen, and understand. Maybe the Dred Scott case would have been decided the same way.
But maybe it would have been without Catholic Justice Roger Taney’s help.

Now, some say if the Catholic bishops and priests in the South
had actively opposed slavery they would been both marginalized
and actively persecuted.
Maybe.
Some say all southern Catholics would’ve been persecuted,
or that southerners would have left the Catholic Church in droves.
Maybe.

But then again, isn’t that what Jesus is talking about in today’s Gospel
when he asks: “Can you drink the cup that I drink”?
He’s talking about the same cup he talks about in the garden of Gethsemane:
“My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;
nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”
The cup of suffering, the cup of the Cross, the cup of his blood poured out.
“For the Son of Man did not come to be served
but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Acceptance of suffering is part of being a Christian.

Of course slavery is behind us, but unfortunately,
many Catholics now accept an even greater social evil.
Because while it’s horrible to take away an innocent person’s freedom,
it is clearly even worse to take away an innocent person’s life.
And so we face the abomination of the 21st century: abortion.

Yet the popes in our time have taught very clearly on this as well:
the Church has constantly and infallibly condemned abortion
as a grave evil—a mortal sin.
As Pope John Paul II wrote in Evangelium Vitae, in 1995:
“by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors
….I declare that direct abortion
… always constitutes a grave moral disorder,
since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being.”

Fortunately, virtually all the American bishops, and most priests,
see this very clearly.
Maybe they don’t all always speak up about it as they might.
Still, one wonders if they imitated Archbishop Rummel,
acting a bit more forcefully,
not worried about pleasing their people
but about serving their people by teaching them the truth,
one wonders if there wouldn’t be less confusion among Catholics
about abortion today.
One wonders if Catholics wouldn’t abandon any party or candidate
who publically supported the killing of innocent human beings by abortion,
just as (today) they would surely abandon any party or candidate
who publicly supported the oppression of innocent human beings
by slavery or unjust discrimination.

But this not just about abortion.
The pope has reminded us, time and again that we must defend,
both the right to life
and traditional marriage (one man/one woman),
and that these are, in his words, “not negotiable.”
And it’s also about religious freedom, especially here in America.
As the pope reminded American Catholics just last January:
“It is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States
come to realize the grave threats
to the Church’s public moral witness…
The seriousness of these threats needs to be clearly appreciated…
Of particular concern are …attempts …to limit
that most cherished of American freedoms,
the freedom of religion.”

And so the bishops and priests cannot, will not, be silent
about these 3 non-negotiables: life, marriage and religious liberty.
Even if it means a little suffering.
If I suffer from a few harsh complaints
or feeling I’ve let you down by being a poor preacher.
Or if you suffer through a homily that makes you feel uncomfortable or bored.
Or even if the Church suffers the loss of parishioners
who refuse to drink from the cup of Christ’s suffering
and instead to go to a church that will make they feel good.
What matters is that we are servants of God,
and learn from God how to rightly serve each other.

All this is not about politics.
And it’s not about telling you how to vote.
It’s about the truth and the teaching of Christ and his Church.
About learning from the terrible mistakes of the past
in order not to repeat those mistakes today.
It’s about warning you against those who embrace intrinsic evils
that will destroy America.
It’s about being a servant of Jesus Christ,
even when it’s difficult, even when it means drinking of the cup of suffering.

October 7, 2012
Homily by Fr. John De Celles
St. Raymond of Peñafort Catholic Church
Springfield, Va.

Today our Bishops ask us to commemorate Respect Life Sunday
—to remember that our nation, and much of the world,
has been caught up in a culture of death spurred on
by the evil of abortion.
In this context today I want to focus on one key aspect of the culture of death,
and that is its effects on women.

Nine months ago certain so called “progressive” politicians
began to accuse more conservative politicians of what they called
waging a “War on Women.”
It quickly became a mantra, and even a whole political strategy
embraced by one of the major political parties[—the Democrats].
And while they overtly make this charge
against their counterparts in the [Republican] [other] Party,
it began and subtly continues to be most fundamentally, and viciously,
a charge against the Catholic Church.

But today I ask: Who is really waging a War on Women?

In the 1960s the feminist movement sprung up as a reaction
against various forms of discrimination against women.
As such, it has many good aspects to it.
Unfortunately, the movement became quickly dominated and manipulated
by radicals influenced by Marxist ideology,
not rooting itself in love and truth but in envy and lies.
So that males became the enemy,
marriage was seen as slavery,
and motherhood a form of bondage.
So the strategy emerged to attack men, marriage and motherhood.

It began to unfold with an effort to lift an ancient ban on contraception,
and to make it not only legal but favored by society.
This began in the early 20th century but really came to fruition
in 1965 when the Supreme Court ruled that
bans on contraception were unconstitutional,
against the newly discovered “right to privacy.”

Progressives argued that this would free women
from unwanted or unplanned pregnancy,
and give them control over their own bodies
so they could pursue education and careers
unhindered by the “burden” of babies.

But who did it really free—who did it really benefit?
50 years later we see that it actually freed men
from their responsibility for pregnancies
—it was the woman’s choice not to contracept,
so pregnancy became her “fault,”
and the babies became the woman’s responsibility,
and the fathers were free to walk away.

Moreover, by separating the necessary and beautiful connection
between conception and sex,
men increasing lost respect for women and their sexuality,
and women became not persons to be respected
but sexual objects to be used.
And the gift of pregnancy—nurturing the life of a new human being—
began to be considered a type of a disease,
one that women had to take medicine to preventive.

But of course, it was really more a poison than a medicine
—the birth control pill normally acts
to cause the body to do something unnatural,
it causes it to be unhealthy.
So is there any surprise that the World Health Organization classifies the pill
as a carcinogen, in the same category as cigarettes?

And then there was divorce.
Around 1970 states started to enact so called “no-fault” divorce laws,
making it extremely easy, in most cases, to get a divorce.
Feminists argued these laws would allow women to free themselves
from abusive or oppressive husbands.
But once again, it has more commonly been used to free men
from their responsibilities to their wives and children.

And the ease of divorce encourages couples
not to try to save struggling marriages—to give up too easily.
In the end, in the overwhelming number of cases,
women get the short end of the stick:
once again receiving primary responsibility of the children,
both practically and financially,
as they are abandoned by husbands and fathers.

And then there was Abortion.
Studies show that between 30 to 60%, perhaps has high as 67%,
of all abortions are directly related to the coercive efforts
of a husband, a boyfriend, or a father.
In other words, abortion is often chosen not by women, but by men.
Studies also show that even when there is not direct coercion,
fear of losing or angering the man in their lives
is also a significant cause for the choice of abortion.
So much for freeing women from their slavery to men.

Also, abortion has always been a backup to contraception,
especially in the eyes of many men.
So once again, men say:
“you should have been more ‘careful’—its’ not my ‘fault’, you deal with it.”
Once again, men are freed from responsibility,
leaving women alone to deal with a challenging pregnancy.

But more than all that, with every abortion there are 2 victims:
the baby whose heart is stopped,
and the woman, the mother, whose heart is broken.
In those moments of fear or confusion or even abandonment,
they may grab hold to the lie that “it’s just a clump of tissue.”
But eventually a mother’s heart has to come to terms with what she’s done
—something so terribly contrary to every instinct, every longing
of their maternal souls.
And when they do, society, having bought into the lies of the abortion culture,
tells them they are wrong to feel guilty,
and even mock them in their pain.

And finally, we have the redefinition of Marriage.

Of course, this was begun when contraception was accepted,
as that separated life-giving-conception from love and commitment.
Even the instinctual connection
between marriage and procreation was broken,
and so marriage was no longer about having children,
as it had always been in the history of mankind.
And marriage became more about sex than permanent commitment
—the commitment strengthen by the birth of children.

And divorce did the same thing:
the no fault divorce makes a joke out of vows of “till death do us part.”
And in abortion, along with mirroring the effects of contraception,
we also see
the wedge it can drive between a husband and wife,
especially when it involves coercion by either,
and how it turns the family from being the refuge of safety
into a den of death.
All these have redefined marriage.

No wonder we now see the push to the most abominable re-definition:
“gay marriage.”
Think about this: this means woman is no longer essential to marriage.
And it completely undermines the very institution itself,
really destroying the fundamental institution
that allows a woman to flourish as mother and wife.

So again I ask: who is waging the war on women?
Is it the Catholic Church, or the “social progressives”?

The Catholic Church, my friends, defends the dignity of women.
Before it was popular, or the enlightened thing to do,
in the ancient world that held that
women were not much more than mere property,
when it was thought that a man couldn’t really be a friend to a woman
because she was so intellectually inferior,
it was the Catholic Church who proclaimed the words of Jesus:
“from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.”
Here he was quoting from the first chapter of Genesis which says:
“God made man in his own image, male and female he created them.”
In other words: one creature, in two ways.
Male and female, equal in dignity, but radically different as well.
Why?

Because created in the image of the God who is love they had to be
both radically equal and radically different
so that they can give themselves to each other in love.
So the differences are a good thing—and a real thing,
essential to being male or to being a woman.
And among those good, no, GREAT and wonderful differences we find what?
–only women can be mothers!
And also, that women have an incredible capacity to nurture and to pacify.
Even the radical feminists admit this, even though they would deny it:
how many times have you heard some radical feminist say,
“if women ruled the world we’d put an end to war”?
Why—because it is deep in their nature to nurture, not fight.
Although they certainly can fight, just as a man can nurture.
But each is given a special capacity that cannot be denied.

And because women have these great “feminine” gifts, especially motherhood,
the Church has always taught its men to respect and honor women.
Standing when a lady comes into a room, or opening a door for her,
was a sign of that respect,
not of “condescension” as some feminists claimed.
And so was protecting her virginity and her sexuality
until it could be expressed in its proper context
with a man who gave and dedicated himself
totally and forever to her in marriage,
and respected the great give of procreation and motherhood,
the most marvelous fruit of her femininity.

So, the Church says “no” to divorce.
As the Lord Jesus says:
“a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh.”
Again quoting from the beginning of Genesis,
but now adding his own clear teaching:
“Therefore what God has joined together,
no human being may separate.”

WE say, a woman has a right to a stable home,
to a husband and a father for her children
who gives himself totally and forever,
so that her wifely and maternal love can flourish.

And the Church says “no” to contraception.
Instead we say with Jesus:
“Let the little children come to me, do not prevent them,”
We refuse to objectify women’s bodies
and make women mere sex objects to pleasure men.
NO!
In Genesis God tells the first husband and wife: “be fruitful and multiply”!
And, again, Jesus says, also quoting genesis: “the two become one flesh”!
The one flesh union means three things:
first: the union of their in life and love
lived out in the ordinary life of the flesh,
second: their bodily union in the marital act of love,
third: the union of their life and love in the one flesh that is their baby.
The Church stands in awe of the gift of feminine fecundity,
as all men, and women, should as well.

And the Church says “no” to abortion.
We will not only not support the killing of little babies,
but we completely reject a practice and mentality
that warps and destroys the very heart of women,
in turning a mother against her child.
We will not condone the coercion of women
to turn against their babies and their very own nature,
transforming an innocent child’s protective and nurturing mommy
into a callous enemy.
We will not stand by as women are crushed by this great evil,
and mocked, ridiculed and silenced when they cry for help!

And the Church says “no” to all forms of redefining marriage.
Again, as Jesus himself reminds us, quoting from Genesis:
“from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.
For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother
and be joined to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh.”
Marriage is the permanent union of one male and one female,
in which they lead one life together,
and from their fruitfulness of their bodily unity and differences,
give life and love to children.

Who has declared war on women?
Not the Catholic Church!
And, frankly, not the Republican Party, which,
in the legislation it supports,
it’s party platform
and the public practice and convictions of its candidates
for President and Vice President,
stands with the Church against abortion and redefining marriage,
and defends the Church’s and the individual’s right, our religious liberty,
to hold, practice and proclaim their belief
in the corrupting effect of contraception.

No, the ones who have declared and wage war on women are those hypocrites
who pretend to be the friend of women: the so called “social progressives.”
And, yes, the Democrat Party has declared war on women,
as it has publically and enthusiastically,
in the legislation it supports,
it’s party platform
and the public practice and conviction
of its candidates for President and Vice President,
embraced abortion and the degradation of marriage,
And it is that party, and her candidates that have insisted
that contraception is not only a right but an essential good
that must be provided and defended,
even if it means throwing out the religious freedom
specifically guaranteed in the constitution
and even crushing the Catholic Church, and any Church,
that dares to defy them.

Who has declared war on women?
As Catholics, it cannot, it will not, be us!
And as Catholics, we cannot be an ally of those who are waging
a war on women.
No, as Catholics, we must use every weapon at our disposal
to peacefully protect women from those who wage war on them.
By our words and actions, by our financial donations and prayers,
and, yes, by our votes in local, state and national elections.

Today is Respect Life Sunday, and all October is Respect Life Month.
The culture of death has its cold icy hand
wrapped around the heart of our nation,
a strangle hold that is destroying our society.
And that heart I speak of is our women, in their wonderful feminine greatness.
We cannot respect life
if we continue to degrade the ones who are so integral
to its conception, birth, nourishing and nurturing.
We cannot respect life if we do not respect women,
and defend them from those who would degrade, diminish or destroy them.

As we enter more deeply into this Holy Mass,
let us join together with Holy Mother Church,
and with our Blessed Mother Mary,
and beg our Lord Jesus Christ,
Spouse of the Church and Son of Mary,
to come to the aid our country, and to us,
as we fight the war for women, and so restore an abiding respect for life.

Today is “Respect Life Sunday,” beginning “Respect Life Month,” in which the American Bishops call us to remember that over 3000 innocent Americans are killed every day by abortions, over 1.3 million a year, for a total of over 50 million dead since 1973.

But even as horrible as that death toll is, we can’t forget that abortion has other consequences as well—consequences that have been eating away at the moral and legal fiber of our nation and culture.

Of course, we cannot forget the consequence of abortion’s devastating effect on women. Especially the women who have been lied to and told, “it’s okay, it’s just a formless clump of cells.” But deep inside they know, or come to know, the truth of what they’ve done. These are the 2nd victims of abortion, but they are ignored and ridiculed for expressing their pain and feelings of guilt. We must not forget them, we must love them and do everything we can to help them heal, and to make sure that the evil of abortion will not continue to plague future generations of women. We must put an end to the real “war on women”—born and unborn.

But the consequences of abortion go beyond even that, as the establishment of a constitutional right to abortion is like a virus injected into the body politic slowly corrupting every other right, and the freedom that is the life’s blood of our great nation. Because there cannot be any human rights if human beings don’t have a right to life. If you’re not alive, you have no rights at all.

This is why, in 1776, when Virginian Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, the only rights he felt it necessary to list were the most fundamental: “the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”—with the right to life being first.

At this point, some might be wondering, “what about the separation of church and state.” But as Pope Benedict told a group of American bishops gathered in Rome last January: “The legitimate separation of Church and State cannot be taken to mean that the Church must be silent on certain issues….”

When most of us think of the separation between church and state we think of the Bill of Rights. What does it actually say? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Notice, it’s not about protecting the government from the church, but protecting the individual and religions from the government.

Just as the “right to life” is the first right listed in the Declaration, the right to freely practice our religion is the very first right listed (in the very first words of the very First Amendment) in the Bill of Rights. And rightly so. Because the freedom of religion is essential to the freedom of thought, to decide for oneself what one believes to be true, right and good. How can we defend any rights if we don’t have that right? And how can we defend any rights as being given to us from God himself, as the Declaration states, unless we have a right to believe in God as we see fit?

But since the right to life necessarily precedes all other rights and liberties, when someone embraces a theory of man and society that rejects the right to life, he thereby perceives all other rights and liberties as not fundamental, natural or God-given, but simply invented by political expediency and political power. So that when those in power find that the exercise of a certain right or freedom is not politically expedient to their agenda, they will quickly dismiss that “freedom” or “right.”

In January 2012 our President did just that. After years of notoriously rejecting the right to life he issued regulations (now in effect) that, while exempting institutions that primarily serve Catholics (e.g., parishes), require most Catholic institutions and employers to provide health insurance for their employees that will cover contraception, abortion inducing drugs, and sterilization. This is repugnant to Catholic morals, but the president directly and willfully dismisses our constitutional and human right to freedom of religion. Moreover, he imposes draconian fines on those who defy him, fines that will bankrupt and close every faithful Catholic college, hospital, and charitable institution (e.g., Catholic Charities, Knight of Columbus, Catholic Relief Services) in the country.

The President says he is not attacking our liberty and that he strongly supports the “freedom to worship.” But as Pope Benedict has reminded us so often, religious freedom is not merely the freedom of worship. “Worship” is not what the First Amendment is about: the exercise of religion is actually practicing the tenets, putting faith into action. In other words, the work of Catholic hospitals, charities etc.—the very organizations the administration is attacking.

Is this direct assault on the Catholic Church aimed to punish the Bishops and faithful Catholic for their opposition to abortion, and our defiance of the President’s relentless promotion of the gay agenda and sexual promiscuity? Perhaps, perhaps not. In any case, just as they tossed out the most fundamental right to life, now they have thrown out the first right that flows from it. And if they can so easily cast aside the first right recognized in the First Amendment, what will keep them from ignoring the rest of the rights listed in the First Amendment: freedom of speech, the press, peaceful assembly, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?

And if they can make Catholics provide contraception, etc., what else can they make us provide? Direct surgical abortions? “Gay weddings”? And if they can close down our charities, can they take away the Church’s tax exempt status or put your priests in jail for preaching against their attack on the Church? You might think it’s a stretch, but according the reasoning of the Supreme Court, the constitutional right to contraception was the basis for both the right to abortion and the right to sodomy. Once you ignore the natural rights of man, and replace them with their opposites, then anything is possible.

As Pope Benedict told the American bishops: “…[I]t is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realize the grave threats to the Church’s public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political …spheres… Of particular concern are …attempts being made to limit …the freedom of religion.…. [and] the right of conscientious objection…”

So what do we do? There are many ways we can effect change. First, we can still exercise our First Amendment right of free speech to tell to our neighbors the truth about what’s going on. And in 4 weeks we can exercise our right to vote to elect congressmen and senators and a president who will defend our God given rights, and end this hellish persecution of Christ and His Catholic Church.

September 30, 2012
Homily by Fr. John De Celles
St. Raymond of Peñafort Catholic Church
Springfield, Va.

Sometimes we’re so busy seeing the differences between ourselves and others
that we fail to see the good things we have in common.
On the other hand, it is important to recognize those differences,
first of all to see the differences that we may want to overcome,
but also, to recognize and protect ourselves
against values that we don’t share.
This tension between recognizing both the good and the bad in others
is a source of particular difficulty for Christians
–we want to see the good in others,
but we don’t want the good that they possess to blind us
so that we fail to notice the goodness that they lack.

Its sort of like the apostles in today’s Gospel when they discover that a man,
a stranger who did “not follow” them
is performing miracles in the name of Jesus.
And it seems that the apostles are confused,
wondering if they should do something to stop him.
But even though this stranger lacks the fullness of the good that would come
with being in the intimate company of Christ,
Jesus tells the apostles:
“Do not prevent him….For whoever is not against us is for us.”

This need to recognize Christian works in those who are not fully in our company
leads us to understand the great importance
that the Catholic Church places on ecumenism.
We’re called to look for the things we have in common
with the various non-Catholic but Christian denominations,
and then to use those as a starting point for both mutual cooperation
in spreading the Gospel
and in beginning the process
of striving for the unity of all Christians everywhere.

And we’re not just called to recognize the goodness of Christ’s truth
in other Christians,
but also to recognize that goodness when it’s possessed by non-Christians
–even atheists.
Because even a non-Christian can come to recognize some of the truth of Christ
–even if they don’t recognize it as Christ’s
–to the extent they pursue the truth with an open and humble heart.
By working with tolerance with people of other denominations, or religions,
or even with atheists,
on issues that we share strong beliefs,
we can build a better and more just society,
and lay the foundation so that the Gospel of Christ might then take root
and spread to all men of goodwill.

And yet, as our ecumenism and religious tolerance increases,
we find ourselves in the dilemma I mentioned earlier.
Sometimes in our rush to see the good in others,
we confuse cooperation and toleration with indifferentism,
truth with ignorance and error,
and even sometimes good with evil.
The good that is present seems to overshadow or mask that which is lacking.

But its important to remember
that just as Jesus insists that we must recognize and respect
the truth that others possess,
he’s even more adamant that we can never compromise
on the fullness of the truth.
He tells his apostles: ” whoever is not against us is for us.”
but he immediately goes on to warn them:
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.”

Now, I don’t mean to imply at that non-Catholics
should have a millstone tied around their neck.
The point is to consider the intensity with which Jesus insists
we not lead anyone astray from him in any way.
Notice that Christ calls us not to mislead his “little ones”
–but by that he means not only children, but all of us that he calls to
“become like these little ones.”
Its wrong to lead anyone away from Christ in anyway–even ourselves.

Leading people astray is easy nowadays
because there’s such a tendency in our society
to see the good in others and then immediately move
to accept everything about the person as good.
We see this everyday.
Sometimes we lead ourselves or others astray in a radical and drastic way
by overtly rejecting Christ and his teachings or his Church.
For example, consider young couples living together before marriage.
How many Catholic parents have tolerated this in their adult children,
perhaps even letting the couples sleep in the same room
when they come to visit.
They focus on the good things about their children
and somehow let those excuse their gravely sinful behavior.
Those parents not only lead themselves astray,
they also lead these adult children astray,
and their younger children as well.
And in doing so cause all “these little ones …to sin.”

And I’m not going to point the finger at just lay people.
How many priests fall into this same trap?
And I’m not just talking about the terrible sexual scandals.
As terrible as those are, they are comparatively very rare.
More common are the times when priests lead little ones to sin
by the heresies they preach,
or the false compassion they show in the confessional.
For example, how many married couples tell me
“but Father, Fr. Smith told us contraception was okay.”
But Jesus had a much different approach to compassion:
“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off [He said].
It is better …to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go …the unquenchable fire.”

But sometimes we lead ourselves or others astray in less dramatic ways,
such as when we accept anything less than the fullness of the faith,
either through ignorance, which is not knowing the fullness of the faith,
or through indifference,
which is disregarding the fact that this ignorance is a problem.
And this ignorance is a problem because while its not evil per se,
there’s no way that we’d ever say that this ignorance
–or lacking of the fullness of the faith–is a good thing.
So it would be wrong to mislead others by allowing them
to remain away from following the true Church of Christ,
the Catholic Church,
without making any effort to share the fullness of the Catholic faith with them,
whether it’s your fallen away Catholic brother,
who’s a great guy but just won’t go to Mass,
or your friend who’s a devout Evangelical,
and you think, well they love Jesus
so I don’t need to tell them about Catholicism.

But it’s easy to mislead people–especially ourselves.
It’s so very hard to walk the fine line between
on the one hand, recognizing the good that others do,
especially when they do it in Christ’s name,
and on the other, charitably rejecting what runs contrary
to the fullness of Christ’s teaching.

Of course all this has great practical application in our lives
—in our families, at work and in society in general.
But especially right now in the middle of a heated political campaign season,
it’s so easy to get confused—to be misled or mislead ourselves.
We so often look at a candidate and want to see the good in them,
and then let the good we see excuse some evil policy they embrace.
On the other hand, it’s so easy to focus on our differences with someone
and fail to recognize the good policies that they embrace
—the good values we have in common with them.

And in all this we fail to recognize, we mislead ourselves,
as to who is for us and who is against us.

For example, in our presidential contest.
We have one candidate who is of a completely different faith than we are:
he’s a Mormon.
And make no mistake about it, Mormons are not Christians.
They say they believe in Jesus as their Lord and Savior,
but they don’t mean what we mean by that:
they do not believe in the Trinitarian God
—one God in three persons;
nor do they believe in the co-equal and co-eternal divinity
of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit;
and I could go on and on.

And yet, you look at the lives that Mormons lead, their moral values,
and you see people striving to live very much as Catholics are striving to live.
In particular, you see in this “Mormon candidate”
a man who not only has a record of
serving those in need,
both personally and with extreme financial generosity,
but also someone who recognizes and promises to uphold
the most basic values Catholics hold dear:
the right to life, especially of unborn babies,
the true meaning of marriage
between one male and one female,
and the God-given right to practice our religion freely
without government coercion or persecution.

And then we have the other candidate, our current President,
who shares the basically same faith as we do
—although not a Catholic, he emphatically claims to be a Christian.
And he wraps himself in Biblical ethos:
he speaks of being “your brother’s keeper”;
and says “from to whom much is given, much shall be required.”
And he seems like a decent man—a good father and husband.
And yet he has consistently undermined
the most basic Christians values:
promoting the most extreme positions on abortion,
championing so-called “gay marriage”
and repeatedly violating the religious liberty of Christians,
especially Catholics,
including trying to force us to provide insurance
to cover contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.

Who really is for us, and who is really against us?
Who is leading us and our “little ones” astray?

We can never completely reject those who would—intentionally or unintentionally—
lead us astray of the Gospel in any way
because then we’d wind up rejecting almost everyone
and whatever truth they posses, or good they do.
But we must also be so careful not to let the good that we see in others
cause us to fail to recognize what is lacking
—and even the evil that is there.

In those who actively oppose Christ and His Church,
we must recognize evil,
even as we see the good they may do.
In those who love Christ but don’t share in the fullness of the faith,
we must recognize not evil but ignorance,
even as we see the true beauty of the faith they do have
–a faith that may be 10 times as strong as yours or mine.
And in those who love Christ but who cannot see
that God wants neither evil nor ignorance for his children,
we must recognize the sin of indifference.

Today, let us pray for the gift to see Christ’s truth
and his goodness in all those around us,
as we strive for Christian unity,
the conversion of the whole world,
and goodwill among all peoples.
But let us also pray that we may always discern clearly
what is for Christ and what is against him.
And let us pray that we may never, in even the smallest way
–either by our sin, or indifference or ignorance—
lead anyone, especially ourselves, away from the fullness of life with Christ.

Welcome, Fr. Joseph Kenna. I’m sure you all join me in extending a warm and heartfelt welcome to Fr. Kenna, our new Parochial Vicar. It’s great to have him here, and I look forward to working with him to help you all draw closer to Christ and His Church. Of course, Father will need a little time to get his feet firmly on the ground, change is hard as we all know. But I know he’s looking forward to rolling up his sleeves and getting to work and to know all of you. Please join me this afternoon (Sunday) after the 12:15 Mass for a welcoming reception/lunch for Father in the Parish Hall.

Religious Education Classes (“CCD”) Starts Tonight! With school starting up for all of our kids in the last two weeks I’m sure they’ve all (at least the public school kids) have been chomping at the bit to get back to religion classes. All kidding aside, there is no more important thing a child studies than his/her religion; the First Commandment tells us: “I am the LORD your God, you shall not have strange gods before me.” If we dedicate time going to school to learn about secular subjects like math, science, and history, but don’t spend time learning about God, don’t we make those secular subjects into false gods and place them ahead of The True God? It is one of a parent’s most fundamental obligations, a grave duty, to educate his/her children in the faith. And children, how can you love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength—how can you love anyone even a little bit—if you don’t know about him?

So I look forward to seeing all of you in religion class this week, and throughout the year. But remember, you only get out of something what you put into it. I expect all students to prepare for class, do their homework, and participate actively in class. And parents, remember that you are the primary educators of your children: CCD is only here to help you. So you must continue their religious education at home, including by making sure your children take their CCD classes seriously.

And I know you will! God bless you all as you begin the new school year!

Voter Registration. Well, as is obvious to anyone who browses the internet, picks up a paper or turns on the TV, there’s a big election coming on November 6. Remember what the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2240) teaches: “co-responsibility for the common good make[s] it morally obligatory …to exercise the right to vote…” Since the we, the citizens of the United States, enjoy supreme sovereignty in this democratic- republic, it is imperative that we exercise that sovereignty by voting for, or choosing, the officials who will represent us well in the government.

But you can’t vote if you aren’t registered to vote. So many times forgetting to do this very simple thing does what no foreign power has been able to do for 230 years—take away the individual’s right to vote. Most of us are already registered to vote here in Fairfax, but some of you tell me you haven’t voted in a while, and I know a lot of our parishioners have moved recently, and most every time you move you have to register to vote in your new state or county.

So, to help you in this regard, next weekend we will have folks manning a table in the narthex with forms and instructions to register you to vote in Fairfax County.

Also if you think you’re going to be away from home or otherwise might not be able to get to the polls on November 6, you should seriously consider voting absentee, if you are eligible to do so. You can vote absentee in one of 2 ways: 1) go into one of 7 special voting locations between October 17 and November 3, or 2) vote absentee by mail. Voting by mail is easiest for a lot of folks, but to do that you have to first apply for an absentee ballot. Next weekend’s table will also have Absentee Ballot Application Forms available for those wishing to exercise that option.

The last day to register to vote is Monday, October 15th, and last date to apply for an absentee ballot by mail is Tuesday, October 30th.

New Precinct Polling Location. You should also note that the voting/poll location for one local precinct has changed this year. Those of us in Precinct 806 will no longer vote at Hunt Valley Elementary School, but will now be voting at the Sydenstricker Methodist Church, 8508 Hooes Road, which is on the north side of the Parkway, just off Sydenstricker. Note that Precinct 807, which has also been voting at Hunt Valley Elementary School will remain at Hunt Valley ES. Your Precinct number is found on your voter registration card.

For more information go to: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/elections/ (there is also a link on our parish website). You can also check on your registration status on this web page.

Democratic Convention. It is a terrible thing that one of our two major political parties, the Democrat Party, so stridently supports the right of a mother to kill her unborn baby, i.e., abortion. The week before last pro-abortion (so called “pro-choice”) pundits ridiculed a Republican Senate candidate for his opposition to abortion in the case of rape and incest (less than 1% of all abortions)—i.e., giving the death penalty to the innocent child for his father’s crime. But this week the Democrat Party, at its National Convention, trotted out speaker after speaker who actively support the most barbarically extreme positions on abortion—including partial birth abortion and allowing babies who survive abortions to die without medical attention. Not to mention, they once again nominated for President a man who holds those same extreme positions: Barrack Obama. Not only that, they released a platform document—their official statement of their political positions—that officially endorses all forms of abortion: “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” This is basically the same position they’ve embraced for years, except that this year they added something new: “regardless of ability to pay.” In other words, they support taxpayer funded abortion, something that 72% of Americans oppose. They want to force you and me to pay for abortions Who is the extremist?

Tomorrow: Weekday Mass Changes to 8 A.M. Please remember that beginning tomorrow, Monday, September 10, Mass will no longer be offered at 9:00 a.m. Monday through Friday, but will be moved to 8:00 a.m.. Let this be an opportunity for all you who find 6:30 Mass “too early” and 9:00 Mass “too late” to finally start coming to morning Mass at the “just right” time of 8:00. (The M-F 6:30am Mass will stay as usual, as will the Wednesday 7:00pm Mass and Saturday 9:00am Mass).
Oremus pro invicem. Fr. De Celles